采用日常生活能力量表对康复效果进行评价。
Activity of Daily Living Scale (ADL) was used to evaluate the effectiveness of rehabilitation.
日常生活能力量表的得分也显示介入治疗组优于对照组，但没有统计学意义。
The Activities of Daily Living score was also better in the intervention group than in controls, although the difference fell short of statistical significance.
采用日常生活能力量表（ADL）对两组患者生活能力情况进行评定，并用简明精神病评定量表（BPRS）观察两组患者的预后。
With activities of daily living (ADL), capable of living conditions of the two groups were assessed with the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) the prognosis of patients were observed.
方法对90例BD患者和90例健康老人进行日常生活能力量表(adl)评定，同时对BD患者进行日常生活能力相关因素分析。
Method 90 patients with BD and 90 healthy elderly people, had been tested with Activity of Daily living Scale and investigated the relevant factors of ADL in BD.
结果：经多元逐步回归分析，进入回归方程的变量依次为日常生活能力量表评分、卒中次数、婚姻状况、陪护情况、抑郁自评量表评分。
Results: Five independent variables had been put into regression equation by multiple regression analysis, which were ADL score, stroke attack time, marriage, carer and SDS score.
运用日常生活能力量表（ADL）、社会功能评定量表（SDSS）、抑郁自评量表（SDS）及护理依赖性评估对干预前后的效果进行分析、比较；
By using ADL, SDSS, SDS and nursing dependent assessment, the effects before and after the interference were analyzed and compared.
方法使用日常生活能力量表（ADL）、症状自评量表（SCL-90）等测定289例60岁以上的住院老年人，进行单因素分析及多元逐步回归分析。
Methods 289 case hospitalized aged above 60 were tested by using activity of daily life scale(ADL), symptom checklist 90(SCL-90) and so on.
两组患者神经功能缺损评分、日常生活能力量表评分均有不同程度的改善，而治疗组痰湿体质评分、生活质量及日常生活能力量表评分改善程度较对照组明显，两组比较有显著差异（P＜0.05）。
The Qil scores and ADL scores in each groups rised had a significant difference(P<0.05), the process of scores in the treated group were obviously superior to that in the control group.
两组患者神经功能缺损评分、日常生活能力量表评分均有不同程度的改善，而治疗组痰湿体质评分、生活质量及日常生活能力量表评分改善程度较对照组明显，两组比较有显著差异（P＜0.05）。
The Qil scores and ADL scores in each groups rised had a significant difference(P<0.05), the process of scores in the treated group were obviously superior to that in the control group.
应用推荐